I think holding my arm in the air for at least eight hours per day to poke around at a screen would suck.
That's my 2¢.
If multitouch screens were used, the design and position of the displays would be changed to suit. Screens would become more of a tablet or table top workplace.
Think Different people! But I guess that's why you're not product designers!
I think holding my arm in the air for at least eight hours per day to poke around at a screen would suck.
That's my 2¢.
I agree.
But this would open up different uses.
Look to Wacom's LCD graphic tablets. You can set them flat on the surface. A monitor doesn't have to be set up the way they are now.
The recommendation for monitors now is to set them lower than many people have them.
It's even considered to be better for them to be down low, so that you don't look straight ahead, but few people have them that way. I remember computer tables, where the monitor was mounted below the surface, angled up, with a glass table top above them. They were comfortable to use, though the glass sometimes led to reflections.
You wouldn't be forced into using the screen for everything. But for some things, it could be much quicker, and easier.
I find that most keyboards these days have poor enough feedback that typing on a monitor keyboard wouldn't be worse. If the monitor is big enough, that would work for a lot of people. My wife's old Atari 400 had a flat, feedbackless keyboard, and she got used to it. A lot of industrial, factory floor equipment, in critical applications, also use such keyboards, so it's not out of the question.
This is really expectable. the secrecy of Apple make is hard to predict clearing their roadmap but one can definitely trust the company and trust that this maybe a new era for Apple. When Steve announced lately that they applied for over 200 patents, that clearly state that Apple is serious about capitalizing on a new market... with brilliant technology that aways make life easier for the rest of us...
If multitouch screens were used, the design and position of the displays would be changed to suit. Screens would become more of a tablet or table top workplace.
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Stylus control is NOT possible now. Remember we had this discussion already. Jobs said that the screen ONLY responds to a finger (or, I guess, some other fleshy body part?DON'T get me started, it's too late. )
That's what happens with capacitance devices. You can't use a stylus with trackpads, either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
I thought about that, but it wouldn't work.
Do you use a graphics tablet? I have a 12 x 18, because I did a lot of graphics work.
Just think of sticking your finger on there, instead of the stylus point. You would have to magnify to at least 1600% to be able to do any work because the finger is such an imprecise instrument.
In point of fact, I've owned both a 6x8 Wacom tablet and a Fingerworks iGesture tablet for years, so I'm very well acquainted with MultiTouch. The iGesture is my primary and preferred pointing device and I use it 99% of the time, even with Fireworks and Photoshop. It is no more and no less accurate than a mouse or the Wacom. Even with the Wacom, it's difficult to be accurate down to a pixel without magnifying the image to at least 400%. I only use the Wacom when I need to do something like drawing or erasing, where the motions of the stylus feel more natural.
Quote:
Now think of this aprox 2.25 x 3.5" screen at 480 x 320. Even if your photo, or drawing, was 640 x480, your finger takes up such a large portion of the screen that you would again have to magnify to very large numbers. With the small, low rez screen, that would mean that you would see almost nothing of the image you are working on.
Your finger would also cover the area of interest, so that you couldn't get an accurate selection of pixels, even if you magnified so that one picture pixel was 16 x 16 on the screen.
Don't forget that this screen is 160 ppi. Therefore, 16 pixels to a side would be only a tenth of an inch square. Could your finger find that square without hitting another one by mistake?
Even if you did magnify to that size, the screen would then only be showing an actual image area of 30 x 20 pixels! How can you work with that? Even an image of 480 x 320 would only show as 60 x 40.
All of which begs the point of just what you expect to do on such a small screen that desperately needs pixel precision. Photoshop? Especially since Apple says it will be a closed system so no 3rd party apps will run on it.
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
It all depends on the angles, lighting, etc. When we do editing, we do it in a darkened room with carefully placed lighting. This isn't a problem to figure out.
Quote:
That's what happens with capacitance devices. You can't use a stylus with trackpads, either.
Yes, I was the first one to bring that up.
quote]
In point of fact, I've owned both a 6x8 Wacom tablet and a Fingerworks iGesture tablet for years, so I'm very well acquainted with MultiTouch. The iGesture is my primary and preferred pointing device and I use it 99% of the time, even with Fireworks and Photoshop. It is no more and no less accurate than a mouse or the Wacom. Even with the Wacom, it's difficult to be accurate down to a pixel without magnifying the image to at least 400%. I only use the Wacom when I need to do something like drawing or erasing, where the motions of the stylus feel more natural.[/q
All of which begs the point of just what you expect to do on such a small screen that desperately needs pixel precision. Photoshop? Especially since Apple says it will be a closed system so no 3rd party apps will run on it.[/QUOTE]
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
It all depends on the angles, lighting, etc. When we do editing, we do it in a darkened room with carefully placed lighting. This isn't a problem to figure out.
Quote:
That's what happens with capacitance devices. You can't use a stylus with trackpads, either.
Yes, I was the first one to bring that up.
quote]
In point of fact, I've owned both a 6x8 Wacom tablet and a Fingerworks iGesture tablet for years, so I'm very well acquainted with MultiTouch. The iGesture is my primary and preferred pointing device and I use it 99% of the time, even with Fireworks and Photoshop. It is no more and no less accurate than a mouse or the Wacom. Even with the Wacom, it's difficult to be accurate down to a pixel without magnifying the image to at least 400%. I only use the Wacom when I need to do something like drawing or erasing, where the motions of the stylus feel more natural.[/quote]
That's why, with serious editing, we use at least 9 x 12, and preferably 12 x 18 tablets. 6 x 8 is far too small for work on large images.
I don't know anyone who would consider using a finger for pixel based editing.
Quote:
All of which begs the point of just what you expect to do on such a small screen that desperately needs pixel precision. Photoshop? Especially since Apple says it will be a closed system so no 3rd party apps will run on it.
Not PS, of course. But there are a lot of painting, photo editing, and drawing programs available for the Palm and Windows Mobile devices. I'm far from being alone on this.
Many games, as well as other programs would also have to be radically changed for this new interface, and not all of them will be better for it.
Matte finish + skin oils are a bad combination. Why do you think we're not supposed to touch current LCD displays with our fingers? And even then, you'll have reduced contrast because the plane of the display is closer to perpendicular to the ceiling lights in most offices.
"We believe this 'Mega-Platform' could help Apple become an 'open-ended' growth story once again with a logical chronology of new products for years to come," the analyst wrote.
Sorry, in English please?
Jeez, these analysts really love their bullshit bingo don't they?
I would say pixel precision is not nearly so important as the peripheral data a Wacom picks up. Pressure especially, but roll, pitch, yaw, also wouldn't be picked up so many people would still need to use an external pointing device.
And if you remember, around the time of the Mac Clones, most of the booths at macworld had CRTs recessed into the desks supposedly because it was "more ergonomic." I suspect that trend has not continued.
If multitouch screens were used, the design and position of the displays would be changed to suit. Screens would become more of a tablet or table top workplace.
Think Different people! But I guess that's why you're not product designers!
So what you'd need a second screen as your keyboard, or you just use the one. We already discussed this in an earlier thread. Didn't sound very appealing no matter how you looked at it. For a phone, Tablet, or remote device maybe, but as a desktop, or workstation interface. Doesn't sound plausible.
Jeez, these analysts really love their bullshit bingo don't they?
Exactly. We are talking about some analysis's prediction which is ridiculous. What makes this clown the great gizmo wonder boy. I just don't buy his "mega-platform" built around multi-touch theory. THis isn't even a rumor. It's a fantasy prediction.
So what you'd need a second screen as your keyboard, or you just use the one. We already discussed this in an earlier thread. Didn't sound very appealing no matter how you looked at it. For a phone, Tablet, or remote device maybe, but as a desktop, or workstation interface. Doesn't sound plausible.
I do agree that as a standard keyboard multitouch isn't the best option, but I do think that multitouch is the future. Forget the qwerty keyboard layout for a moment and imagine a way of being able to 'touch' your data, move and manipulate 3D objects with your hands, interact with 'piles' of documents in a multi layered environment. This would be a massive advantage to the design world. Using your fingers and hands would be far better than having to use a mouse or pen as a pointing device. I don't think this is something we will see you're average programmer or receptionist getting excited about just yet, but for me at least, multitouch is the way forward.
...imagine a way of being able to 'touch' your data, move and manipulate 3D objects with your hands, interact with 'piles' of documents in a multi layered environment. This would be a massive advantage to the design world. Using your fingers and hands would be far better than having to use a mouse or pen as a pointing device.
Perhaps I am missing something here, but are you saying that the fingers are more precise in design work than the mouse/keyboard/pen?
Perhaps I am missing something here, but are you saying that the fingers are more precise in design work than the mouse/keyboard/pen?
Not necessarily as precise as a pen or more precise than a mouse, but I think that you can save a lot of time with multitouch, at least for the rough work, then maybe go back and fine tune it with some other pointing device. It looks like it would be a better brainstorming tool, making it easier to rearrange and adjust clips, cuts and other elements for experimentation.
I would say pixel precision is not nearly so important as the peripheral data a Wacom picks up. Pressure especially, but roll, pitch, yaw, also wouldn't be picked up so many people would still need to use an external pointing device.
Yes, much of that is important as well, and due to how the Wacom stylus works, could not be duplicated on the touchscreen easily.
Quote:
And if you remember, around the time of the Mac Clones, most of the booths at macworld had CRTs recessed into the desks supposedly because it was "more ergonomic." I suspect that trend has not continued.
Yes, I did mention those desks.
The bulk of the crt was to blame, as was the idea of getting more desk space for the office worker.
But ergonomic studies have shown that people have their monitors too high. If you look at the instructions from the monitor manufacturers, you will see that the top of the screen should be at eye level, as that is much less tiring for the eyes, and neck and back. But most people still put their monitors too high. so it's a matter of teaching people the proper thing to do.
If you sit, and look straight ahead, you will notice that it requires effort, whereas a more natural position is with your head slightly inclined, and your eyes looking downward.. A monitor with the bottom at desk height, resting at a 45° angle is actually far more comfortable to work with, than a monitor raised, and 90° from the desk.
Crt's don't allow that, so we don't use it. And like the QWERTY keyboard, we do what we do, because that's what we've been doing.
Like the old expression "If it's good enough for my father, it's good enough for me."
But a multi-touch monitor, with the 15 simultaneous points this can do, might change that.
Perhaps I am missing something here, but are you saying that the fingers are more precise in design work than the mouse/keyboard/pen?
Well that's not what I said, I said better.. but yes if you like! Don't think of how things are today! Software would change to take advantage of the new technologies. There's no reason why a finger couldn't be as accurate as a mouse or stylus if applications were developed that way. You could pinch zoom in and out in an instant down to sub pixel level and almost feel what you are designing.
Comments
I think holding my arm in the air for at least eight hours per day to poke around at a screen would suck.
That's my 2¢.
If multitouch screens were used, the design and position of the displays would be changed to suit. Screens would become more of a tablet or table top workplace.
Think Different people! But I guess that's why you're not product designers!
I think holding my arm in the air for at least eight hours per day to poke around at a screen would suck.
That's my 2¢.
I agree.
But this would open up different uses.
Look to Wacom's LCD graphic tablets. You can set them flat on the surface. A monitor doesn't have to be set up the way they are now.
The recommendation for monitors now is to set them lower than many people have them.
It's even considered to be better for them to be down low, so that you don't look straight ahead, but few people have them that way. I remember computer tables, where the monitor was mounted below the surface, angled up, with a glass table top above them. They were comfortable to use, though the glass sometimes led to reflections.
You wouldn't be forced into using the screen for everything. But for some things, it could be much quicker, and easier.
I find that most keyboards these days have poor enough feedback that typing on a monitor keyboard wouldn't be worse. If the monitor is big enough, that would work for a lot of people. My wife's old Atari 400 had a flat, feedbackless keyboard, and she got used to it. A lot of industrial, factory floor equipment, in critical applications, also use such keyboards, so it's not out of the question.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=72599
------------
Find more articles and tutorials about Apple at www.mostofmymac.com
If multitouch screens were used, the design and position of the displays would be changed to suit. Screens would become more of a tablet or table top workplace.
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
Stylus control is NOT possible now. Remember we had this discussion already. Jobs said that the screen ONLY responds to a finger (or, I guess, some other fleshy body part?DON'T get me started, it's too late.
That's what happens with capacitance devices. You can't use a stylus with trackpads, either.
I thought about that, but it wouldn't work.
Do you use a graphics tablet? I have a 12 x 18, because I did a lot of graphics work.
Just think of sticking your finger on there, instead of the stylus point. You would have to magnify to at least 1600% to be able to do any work because the finger is such an imprecise instrument.
In point of fact, I've owned both a 6x8 Wacom tablet and a Fingerworks iGesture tablet for years, so I'm very well acquainted with MultiTouch. The iGesture is my primary and preferred pointing device and I use it 99% of the time, even with Fireworks and Photoshop. It is no more and no less accurate than a mouse or the Wacom. Even with the Wacom, it's difficult to be accurate down to a pixel without magnifying the image to at least 400%. I only use the Wacom when I need to do something like drawing or erasing, where the motions of the stylus feel more natural.
Now think of this aprox 2.25 x 3.5" screen at 480 x 320. Even if your photo, or drawing, was 640 x480, your finger takes up such a large portion of the screen that you would again have to magnify to very large numbers. With the small, low rez screen, that would mean that you would see almost nothing of the image you are working on.
Your finger would also cover the area of interest, so that you couldn't get an accurate selection of pixels, even if you magnified so that one picture pixel was 16 x 16 on the screen.
Don't forget that this screen is 160 ppi. Therefore, 16 pixels to a side would be only a tenth of an inch square. Could your finger find that square without hitting another one by mistake?
Even if you did magnify to that size, the screen would then only be showing an actual image area of 30 x 20 pixels! How can you work with that? Even an image of 480 x 320 would only show as 60 x 40.
All of which begs the point of just what you expect to do on such a small screen that desperately needs pixel precision. Photoshop? Especially since Apple says it will be a closed system so no 3rd party apps will run on it.
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
Have you ever heard of a matte finish?
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
It all depends on the angles, lighting, etc. When we do editing, we do it in a darkened room with carefully placed lighting. This isn't a problem to figure out.
That's what happens with capacitance devices. You can't use a stylus with trackpads, either.
Yes, I was the first one to bring that up.
quote]
In point of fact, I've owned both a 6x8 Wacom tablet and a Fingerworks iGesture tablet for years, so I'm very well acquainted with MultiTouch. The iGesture is my primary and preferred pointing device and I use it 99% of the time, even with Fireworks and Photoshop. It is no more and no less accurate than a mouse or the Wacom. Even with the Wacom, it's difficult to be accurate down to a pixel without magnifying the image to at least 400%. I only use the Wacom when I need to do something like drawing or erasing, where the motions of the stylus feel more natural.[/q
All of which begs the point of just what you expect to do on such a small screen that desperately needs pixel precision. Photoshop? Especially since Apple says it will be a closed system so no 3rd party apps will run on it.[/QUOTE]
Are you aware that horizontal displays would have far more problems with glare from overhead lights than vertical screens? Anybody who ever played a "cocktail table" style arcade game can tell you that. Not to mention they take substantially more room on the desk. Even more if we still need regular keyboards, and anyone do does a lot of typing will.
It all depends on the angles, lighting, etc. When we do editing, we do it in a darkened room with carefully placed lighting. This isn't a problem to figure out.
That's what happens with capacitance devices. You can't use a stylus with trackpads, either.
Yes, I was the first one to bring that up.
quote]
In point of fact, I've owned both a 6x8 Wacom tablet and a Fingerworks iGesture tablet for years, so I'm very well acquainted with MultiTouch. The iGesture is my primary and preferred pointing device and I use it 99% of the time, even with Fireworks and Photoshop. It is no more and no less accurate than a mouse or the Wacom. Even with the Wacom, it's difficult to be accurate down to a pixel without magnifying the image to at least 400%. I only use the Wacom when I need to do something like drawing or erasing, where the motions of the stylus feel more natural.[/quote]
That's why, with serious editing, we use at least 9 x 12, and preferably 12 x 18 tablets. 6 x 8 is far too small for work on large images.
I don't know anyone who would consider using a finger for pixel based editing.
All of which begs the point of just what you expect to do on such a small screen that desperately needs pixel precision. Photoshop? Especially since Apple says it will be a closed system so no 3rd party apps will run on it.
Not PS, of course. But there are a lot of painting, photo editing, and drawing programs available for the Palm and Windows Mobile devices. I'm far from being alone on this.
Many games, as well as other programs would also have to be radically changed for this new interface, and not all of them will be better for it.
Have you ever heard of a matte finish?
Matte finish + skin oils are a bad combination. Why do you think we're not supposed to touch current LCD displays with our fingers? And even then, you'll have reduced contrast because the plane of the display is closer to perpendicular to the ceiling lights in most offices.
"We believe this 'Mega-Platform' could help Apple become an 'open-ended' growth story once again with a logical chronology of new products for years to come," the analyst wrote.
Sorry, in English please?
Jeez, these analysts really love their bullshit bingo don't they?
And if you remember, around the time of the Mac Clones, most of the booths at macworld had CRTs recessed into the desks supposedly because it was "more ergonomic." I suspect that trend has not continued.
If multitouch screens were used, the design and position of the displays would be changed to suit. Screens would become more of a tablet or table top workplace.
Think Different people! But I guess that's why you're not product designers!
So what you'd need a second screen as your keyboard, or you just use the one. We already discussed this in an earlier thread. Didn't sound very appealing no matter how you looked at it. For a phone, Tablet, or remote device maybe, but as a desktop, or workstation interface. Doesn't sound plausible.
Sorry, in English please?
Jeez, these analysts really love their bullshit bingo don't they?
Exactly. We are talking about some analysis's prediction which is ridiculous. What makes this clown the great gizmo wonder boy. I just don't buy his "mega-platform" built around multi-touch theory. THis isn't even a rumor. It's a fantasy prediction.
Anyone who gets their greasy fingers on my Mac's screen will feel the wrath of my shatterproof plastic ruler across their knuckles!
Touch screen Macs - Noooooooooooooooo!
That's all we need, people trying to post on AI with Cheetos dust all over their touch screens!
So what you'd need a second screen as your keyboard, or you just use the one. We already discussed this in an earlier thread. Didn't sound very appealing no matter how you looked at it. For a phone, Tablet, or remote device maybe, but as a desktop, or workstation interface. Doesn't sound plausible.
I do agree that as a standard keyboard multitouch isn't the best option, but I do think that multitouch is the future. Forget the qwerty keyboard layout for a moment and imagine a way of being able to 'touch' your data, move and manipulate 3D objects with your hands, interact with 'piles' of documents in a multi layered environment. This would be a massive advantage to the design world. Using your fingers and hands would be far better than having to use a mouse or pen as a pointing device. I don't think this is something we will see you're average programmer or receptionist getting excited about just yet, but for me at least, multitouch is the way forward.
...imagine a way of being able to 'touch' your data, move and manipulate 3D objects with your hands, interact with 'piles' of documents in a multi layered environment. This would be a massive advantage to the design world. Using your fingers and hands would be far better than having to use a mouse or pen as a pointing device.
Perhaps I am missing something here, but are you saying that the fingers are more precise in design work than the mouse/keyboard/pen?
Perhaps I am missing something here, but are you saying that the fingers are more precise in design work than the mouse/keyboard/pen?
Not necessarily as precise as a pen or more precise than a mouse, but I think that you can save a lot of time with multitouch, at least for the rough work, then maybe go back and fine tune it with some other pointing device. It looks like it would be a better brainstorming tool, making it easier to rearrange and adjust clips, cuts and other elements for experimentation.
I would say pixel precision is not nearly so important as the peripheral data a Wacom picks up. Pressure especially, but roll, pitch, yaw, also wouldn't be picked up so many people would still need to use an external pointing device.
Yes, much of that is important as well, and due to how the Wacom stylus works, could not be duplicated on the touchscreen easily.
And if you remember, around the time of the Mac Clones, most of the booths at macworld had CRTs recessed into the desks supposedly because it was "more ergonomic." I suspect that trend has not continued.
Yes, I did mention those desks.
The bulk of the crt was to blame, as was the idea of getting more desk space for the office worker.
But ergonomic studies have shown that people have their monitors too high. If you look at the instructions from the monitor manufacturers, you will see that the top of the screen should be at eye level, as that is much less tiring for the eyes, and neck and back. But most people still put their monitors too high. so it's a matter of teaching people the proper thing to do.
If you sit, and look straight ahead, you will notice that it requires effort, whereas a more natural position is with your head slightly inclined, and your eyes looking downward.. A monitor with the bottom at desk height, resting at a 45° angle is actually far more comfortable to work with, than a monitor raised, and 90° from the desk.
Crt's don't allow that, so we don't use it. And like the QWERTY keyboard, we do what we do, because that's what we've been doing.
Like the old expression "If it's good enough for my father, it's good enough for me."
But a multi-touch monitor, with the 15 simultaneous points this can do, might change that.
That's all we need, people trying to post on AI with Cheetos dust all over their touch screens!
Well, as my daughter has already destroyed three keyboards with food and drink, I would think that this would be more reliable.
And not everyone is a slob.
Perhaps I am missing something here, but are you saying that the fingers are more precise in design work than the mouse/keyboard/pen?
Well that's not what I said, I said better.. but yes if you like! Don't think of how things are today! Software would change to take advantage of the new technologies. There's no reason why a finger couldn't be as accurate as a mouse or stylus if applications were developed that way. You could pinch zoom in and out in an instant down to sub pixel level and almost feel what you are designing.